PDA

View Full Version : are light tanks the matildas?



Ayak
05-03-2006, 06:45 AM
I have used sc2000, cannot believe that the matildas as light tanks should be described:

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/2282/putada2pf.png

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

------------------
http://www.e111-il2.com
http://www.escuadron111.com

HotelBushranger
05-03-2006, 07:05 AM
Yep, they look like Matildas. Matildas had a 2 pounder gun (i.e. useless against anything with metal armour), but it was heavily armoured and given the nickname "Queen of the Desert", because it took so much battle damage.

Tell ya what, next time just try and get it to fall into the crater http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ImpStarDuece
05-03-2006, 07:24 AM
Matildas were HEAVY tanks, at least until 1942-1943.

They weighed anywhere from 27-30 tons, but had a very light main armament of a 2 lbr/40mm cannon. While effective against early Panzer IIIs and IVs of 1940-1941, it was outdated and needed to be replaced by the 6 lbr.

Most tanks of the 1939-1941 period were considerably lighter and even late war tanks were rarely more than 30 tons:

Panzer 35: 11 tons
Panzer 38: 10 tons
Valentine: 16-18 tons
Panzer III: 20-23 tons
Panzer IV: 22-24 tons
T-34: 30-32 tons
M3 Lee: 28 tons
M4 Sherman: 29-33 tons
Cromwell: 28 tons

WWMaxGunz
05-03-2006, 08:42 AM
If your scales 10 Metros means 10 Meters then look again it is at least 100 meters!
The tank itself is 6 meters long. Use your eyes, how far is 10 Metros?

TheGozr
05-03-2006, 09:56 AM
WWMaxGunz
yes those 10 metros are a bit stretch!... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

Ayak
05-03-2006, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
If your scales 10 Metros means 10 Meters then look again it is at least 100 meters!
The tank itself is 6 meters long. Use your eyes, how far is 10 Metros?

lol, that's true http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif 100m

Metro is spanish word, and mean meters...

rgr, But I continue that without understanding why it is easier to destroy one kv1 (heavy tank) that one matilda.

Ayak
05-03-2006, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
Matildas were HEAVY tanks, at least until 1942-1943.

Roger, so is the description of the game what is badly, thank you.

WWMaxGunz
05-03-2006, 03:11 PM
Pretty sure I see two dea and burning tanks in that screenie.

Matildas were heavy tanks through WWII. Heavy and slow. Later models had 6 pounder guns
(57mm) or 3 in howitzer in the Combat Support versions. Not sure but maybe there was an
AA version and pretty sure there was a Command Tank version.

I think that the Churchill line took over the Matildas, some had a 95mm... is that 25 pounder?

ImpStarDuece
05-03-2006, 04:58 PM
25lbr is 88mm.

The British used the 25lbr as their standard light field gun for the war. It had very fast traverse, reasonable range and excellent RoF. Read 'The Guns of War' by George G. Blackburn for an excellent account of the role of the 25lbr in the Normandy and Northern Europe campaigns.

HotelBushranger
05-04-2006, 05:32 AM
There was no AA Matilda, but there was an AA Crusader, 2 different variants. Also pretty sure there was a Command Matilda.

GR142_Astro
05-04-2006, 06:34 AM
Agreed, I think your Metro scale is off. Here is one Metro:

http://images.consumerguide.com/autoreview/400x266/1995-2001-Geo-Chevrolet-Metro-95125011990103.JPG

Draughluin1
05-05-2006, 03:28 AM
Most Matilda MkII's just had the 2 pounder (40mm), a few, the CS version had the 3" gun. Slow, reliable, heavy armour (78mm), but unfortunately the small turret ring meant it couldn't be effictively upgunned to counter improving enemy armour. It never had the 6 pounder (57mm) gun. Replaced as a "gun tank" in Europe, after El Alamein (late 42). The later Valentine and Churchill's also started with the 2 pounders, but like the Matilda, also had the turret ring problem, which effectively limited them to 75mm for the gun tanks. Australians used them to good effect in PNG, particulary the howitzer models.

Kurfurst__
05-05-2006, 05:16 AM
Matty, a light tank? Tell that to anyone who played Battlefield Europe. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

When Matty appears in the chatbar, it means " all panzer hide and lets wait for Stuka/88/AT-infantry". Experient tank drivers used to fire at the track when it's on the move, which stops the matty and swings it around just to allow a hit on it's only vulnerable sweet spot, fuel pannies of some sort on the side behind the turret, being only 40mm thick. In real life, 88s and 105mm field howitzers were it's true killers. It's ca80 mm armor all around - think of it as a friggin 1940 version of the Tiger tank.

WWMaxGunz
05-05-2006, 07:09 AM
My goof, it was the Valentine (nearly as heavy) that got the 6 pdr.

There were Matildas that had the anti-mine flail such as the Scorpion.
Australia had Matildas with flamethrowers (Murray FT and Frog) and one with a 7 spigot
mortar "hedgehog" (a naval antisub weapon, mighta been wicked on land) on the rear,
name is Matilda Hedgehog.

Sorry.

Fox_3
05-05-2006, 07:23 AM
Many Matildas had there turrets removed and replaced with an armoured search light. These were known as CDLs or Canal Defence Lights. Their primary use was blinding enemy ground forces at night.

They saw service along side Lee/Grant CDLs during the Rhine crossing.

joeap
05-05-2006, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
It's ca80 mm armor all around - think of it as a friggin 1940 version of the Tiger tank.

Sans a killer gun though. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

HerrGraf
05-05-2006, 08:53 PM
One has to remember that the British defined their tanks as:
light, infantry, and cruiser
All infantry tanks were heavy armored and slow as to directly support said ground pounders. The Matildas and Churchills were the two most common infantry tanks used in combat by British forces. Both rather anemically armed for their time periods.